From: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] disable softlockup detection at boottime
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 13:52:52 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080428185252.GC1167@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080428165544.GE18210@elte.hu>
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 06:55:44PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> good idea - but why dont you set softlockup_thresh to 0, which is the
> "off" switch already? (and that way it can be turned back on later as
> well, by the sysadmin.)
>
I'm getting unaligned access errors trying to set it to anything, so it's not working for me currently (2.6.25):
It's tripping up on the address of 'one', which is an int that is not properly aligned for the unsigned long comparison in proc_doulongvec_minmax on my 64 bit machine. Also, the value '0' is invalid for softlockup_thresh, correct?
I temporarily got around these issues with the following hack.
Index: linux/kernel/sysctl.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/kernel/sysctl.c 2008-04-16 21:49:44.000000000 -0500
+++ linux/kernel/sysctl.c 2008-04-28 13:37:43.000561710 -0500
@@ -748,9 +748,9 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {
.data = &softlockup_thresh,
.maxlen = sizeof(unsigned long),
.mode = 0644,
- .proc_handler = &proc_doulongvec_minmax,
+ .proc_handler = &proc_dointvec_minmax,
.strategy = &sysctl_intvec,
- .extra1 = &one,
+ .extra1 = &zero,
.extra2 = &sixty,
Also, I'm not convinced that changing this to 0 does indeed switch off softlockup detection (but I could be missing something):
void softlockup_tick(void)
{
..
..
/* Warn about unreasonable delays: */
if (now <= (touch_timestamp + softlockup_thresh))
return;
per_cpu(print_timestamp, this_cpu) = touch_timestamp;
spin_lock(&print_lock);
printk(KERN_ERR "BUG: soft lockup - CPU#%d stuck for %lus! [%s:%d]\n",
this_cpu, now - touch_timestamp,
current->comm, task_pid_nr(current));
Dimitri
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-28 18:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-23 20:16 [PATCH] disable softlockup detection at boottime Dimitri Sivanich
2008-04-23 21:55 ` Randy Dunlap
2008-04-23 22:24 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-04-28 16:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-28 18:52 ` Dimitri Sivanich [this message]
2008-04-29 12:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-29 12:44 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-04-29 14:13 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080428185252.GC1167@sgi.com \
--to=sivanich@sgi.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox